How to tell if a man is in the women’s locker room for nefarious purposes or because of his “Gender Identity”

March 6, 2016

Laura Lindstrand of the Washington State Human Rights Commission on how women can determine if the creepy dude in the locker room has a psychological “Gender Identity”:

“You can tell if someone is lying or if they’re there for reasons they shouldn’t be. Are they dressed like a woman? Are they making any attempt to look like a woman? What are their mannerisms like? Are they speaking low or high? If none of those things are present, or if the person seems sneaky or belligerent, [you] can take action.”

When in doubt, women should wait for the man to commit a crime against them: “Voyeurism, stalking, inappropriate touching, sexual assault — those are all addressed under the criminal code. As soon as that person starts to display inappropriate behavior, that can be dealt with immediately. If they’re doing something they shouldn’t be doing, they need to be made to leave, no matter who they are.”

106 Responses to “How to tell if a man is in the women’s locker room for nefarious purposes or because of his “Gender Identity””

“To many — including Mayor Ed Murray — this is an extremist attack on transgender people, and a reminder to “remain vigilant” in the fight for LGBTQ rights, as the Mayor said in a statement following the narrow defeat of the Senate bill that would have done what this initiative is now attempting.”
Fuck all of this! First of all, I am not an “extremist” for wanting sex-segregated spaces for women. Secondly, I hate how liberals claim we have to desegregate women’s spaces in the name of LGBGWTFBBQ rights when that actually hurts the Lesbians who are supposed to be a part of that alphabet soup (along with all other women, of course). I don’t even identify with the “LGBT” acronym any more— it is apparently against me as a lesbian. Get the L out!

It is! Pure misogyny. When they won’t even LISTEN to women’s concerns, when they must purge any dissent from comment sections, no matter how civil, when they feel perfectly free to silence women with the sexist slur TERF – it is nothing but misogyny. It’s just “STFU and do as told, ya bigoted wenches” from the left. No one ever even asked us what we thought was best.

I don’t know any of the acronyms other than LGBT but it seems like common sense that if a person has a penis he/she belongs in the men’s restroom. If you’re Trans/Crossdresser and haven’t yet committed to the sexual reassignment surgery then you have no business being in the women’s restroom. If you only want to play in women’s clothes then bring it over to our bathroom and we’ll let you know if we believe you.

Most Trans/Crossdressers that I have seen are men that grew up as men, are as physically imposing as men and have distorted attitudes of what being a man/”Macho-man” is all about. They are psychologically imbalanced and physically aggressive more so with women than with men. How are women supposed to react if they have been raped and/or abused by a man and then they have to deal with one in the relative safety and security of the bathroom?

If he has a penis, send him our way, he would be a man’s issue not a woman’s issue until he get’s a gender reassignment.

Also, please stop with all the labels and sublabels. Their confusing, they dilute the voice of the gay population and as this example shows they overcomplicate the situation.

Inversion of the penis or removal of testicles is not required in order to change legal gender demarcation on documents, in the US one does not even need to be on HRT ( cross sex hormones) in order to change legal gender demarcation on SSN or pass port.
The trans community has been working on making it possible for men to retain full, intact male genitalia and still be legally “women” since the 90s and occupy female sex segregated spaces since the 90s.

Common sense ??!! What is this new idea? The overcomplication is willingly cultivated by the transgender lobby. In more quaint times, we would have called this kind of tactics malicious obfuscation. Trans love to spew page after page of utter bs nonsense. I call this the squid maneuver: if you cant win the argument on moral or ethical ground, just spout as much cryptic hogwash as possible.

Also typical of the average sociopath, they have no qualm to appeal to the compassionate side of people while being completely unable to feel it for anybody but themselves. This is why they find totally acceptable to have a grown man dangling his berries in front of a 7 yo girl in the public change room. Its the child and her parents who are the mean bigots. Honestly, you gotta admire how they blurred the line between sexual orientations and sexual perversions to highjack the LGB movement.

Absolutely- have no idea where and when it turned into such a nasty battle to keep a man out of a women’s shower!! I don’t appreciate an open invite for any fella who wants to stroll in! And now we are supposed to watch for specific mannerisms all while showering ourselves and our children?!

I will definitely take that advice and deal with them as soon as they commit a crime said no 120 lb woman when faced with a 170 lb criminal ever. No worries!

” When in doubt, women should wait for the man to commit a crime against them: “Voyeurism, stalking, inappropriate touching, sexual assault — those are all addressed under the criminal code.

As soon as that person starts to display inappropriate behavior, that can be dealt with immediately. If they’re doing something they shouldn’t be doing, they need to be made to leave, no matter who they are.”

A man called Joel Hardman donned a lady-wig and a lady-mask to perve on women in the toilets of a major shopping centre I used to visit in Birmingham (UK). Hardman admitted in court to previously spying on women in the toilets of Birmingham University and to spying on someone doing a ‘private act’. Hardman later went on to break the conditions of his placement on the Sex Offenders’ Register, by failing to report his address, and stabbed the police officer who attempted to arrest him in the head.

It’s dangerous and stupid to suggest that women place themselves at risk while trying to read the intentions of men in their spaces. I don’t want to have to guess why he’s there, I just want to know that he shouldn’t be. Sex-segregation gives women protection and certainty whereas gender-segregation entrusts rapists and voyeurs to behave with integrity and restraint in not exploiting the loophole.

Thanks for the link, Rosemary. That dude is probably having the biggest laugh about these new laws. Men with certain fetishes know now all they have to do is dress in woman’s , clothes speak in a high voice (per the article quoted in the OP). Women will feel uncomfortable, but the onus is now on US, women, to prove that a man doesn’t belong in the ladies room.

But he is wearing pink capri pants and a long wig so NBD- this ladyee probably had a very good reason for peeping under the stall of a 5-year old girl. Transgenders just want to pee in peace! Sometimes they just need to put a mirrors and cameras under the stalls, behind toilets and in lockerooms to make sure they bringing accuracy to their laydee-LARPING. They are being murdered every 4 minutes! You oppressive bigots need to let them live free and wild.

Just what we already knew they were doing and what they wanted to make enshrined in law so they could do it without being stopped or questioned. Why else are men wanting access to women’s restrooms? Like the rest of the trans cult crap, it’s all so obvious.

She could email her friend in Cologne, the Mayor, to get some tips for a ‘female code of conduct’. That would include, not laughing unnecessarily in a public place, wearing modest clothing, and keeping men an arm’s length away (put your arm outstretched ladies = effective measure against male assault).

Perving over the top of stalls, flopping out a penis, sorry, shenis, and attempting to video women on the khazi is not really sexual assault and you shouldn’t mind all that much.

Other than that: chastity belts, burkhas and/or – don’t go out in public, you are a danger to yourselves and society (men).

Please readers, give a thought to commenting on the Seattle Weekly article as well as here. There are so many bright intelligent voices here and as a woman in Washington state I feel I am fighting a losing battle. I feel alone when I try to talk to my friends about this. Seattle readers need to hear women’s voices and the perspectives of Gender Trender readers are really powerful. I am so grateful for this blog.

You aren’t alone in WA, I had the same reaction. Im kind of baffled that theres been so little thouhgt out into the Washington rule. Bathrooms are bad enough but allowing males into locker rooms and women only shelters? What a nightmare.

This law also doesn’t allow for banning offenders from women’s spaces (unless courts and parole boards manage to make that a part of a sex offender’s sentencing or parole conditions). But empowering a business to say “get out and stay out” to a repeat offender? That appears nowhere in the text of the law.

So far, businesses won’t be punished by the government for kicking a “real woman” out of the women’s facilities, but I’m certain that’s just around the corner. I’ve also seen no indication that an MTF can’t sue a business in his own right, unless that’s an element of the law I haven’t seen.

Keep sucking that dick, Laura Lindstrand! Thanks for advising women on how to completely ignore our own needs (and instincts for safety) in order to serve those of men. You are a horrible, despicable person.

We know three things (1.) There are far more male registered sex offenders than female sex offenders (2.) Studies that go back decades show that paraphilias (voyeurism, etc.) are more common in males. Some men will do pretty much anything to prev on women. (3.) Males who identify as transgender or cross dress offend at the same rate as other males.

Women don’t have the magical ability to read men’s minds. How can women read a person’s mind? There is no reliable way to tell the difference between a male dressed in a skirt, wig, and makeup who intends to carry out some voyeuristic act from a male dressed in a skirt, wig, and makeup who isn’t.

As to the example Gallus gives, he isn’t the only male to dress up in a wig and skirt to gain access to women’s restrooms where he can perv on women. These are the males who were caught. For every male dressed in wig, makeup, and skirt that is discovered photographing women, for all we know, there could be two or three out there who haven’t been caught. Everyone has a cell phone today, and all it takes is a couple of clicks. Then, post it online at one of the 13 million porn/voyeur sites.

There are millions of sites on the internet for voyeurs. Google “bathroom voyeur” and there are 13 million hits with titles like “young-girl-naked-bathroom-voyeur videos”. Hell yes, men get off on this, and hell yes they have been doing it for a long time. I wonder what these women who feel so sorry for poor trans will do if they ever discover a photo of themselves, or their daughter, at some sleazy porn/voyeur site.

In 2013, Jason Pomare victimized women in Los Angeles. He wore a bra, wig, and dress to gain access to a women’s bathroom at a Los Angeles Macy’s Department Store so he could secretly video-record the women and girls inside. He had a video camera in a bag, which he slid underneath stalls in order to secretly video-record women and girls as they were using the toilet. When he was caught, he had hours of video of women and girls he recorded by pointing his camera under restroom stalls.

In 2013, Rodney Kenneth Petersen was arrested for dressing as a woman to enter a woman’s dormitory and take pictures of the coeds at Loma Linda University in California. An investigation revealed that Peterson had previously dressed as a woman and entered other female-only facilities, trying to take photos of women and girls with a cell phone he had hidden in his purse.

In 2012, Taylor J. Buehler was arrested in Everett, Washington for voyeurism. He donned a bra and wig to appear as a woman so he could go into the women’s bathroom at Everett Community College. Once inside the bathroom, he began leering at the two women who were using the facilities. After his arrest, he admitted that he had previously taken a shower in a girls’ locker room for “sexual gratification.” Buehler was convicted of voyeurism.

In 2011, Joel Hardman, a postgraduate student at the University of Birmingham in England, disguised himself with a women’s rubber mask and wig in order to gain access to women’s restrooms, where he spied on women using the toilets. After being arrested, he explained that he got sexual gratification from listening to women using toilets. While in the bathrooms, he not only listened—he also made audio recordings of the women urinating.

I did as you said but just googled ”bathroom secret camera’ and got -About 5,100,000 results (0.56 seconds).There is a massive market for these devices/ uploaded videos of women being filmed. Who is doing this or watching this, no-one?

I want a device I can carry on my keychain, that detects recording devices in a room. You know, you go in a bathroom, sweep your ReDeDe! (catchy commercial name) back and forth at it, and it tells you whether any device is there. Janitors could even use it as a matter of course. Solve that problem! Coming to an infomercial soon!

In regular online discussions of bathroom issues, people who somewhat get it, will inevitably say, “Lets just have single stall bathrooms, problem solved.” What does not dawn on them is that whenever men have access to that bathroom, they have the chance to plant recording devices. We need to start pointing that out on these growing comment sections, along with the astounding prevalence of it as stated above.

Actually the situation may be worse than simply that transwomen offend at the same rate as males. There is a California study in prisons which shows that the transwomen in that study are more likely to be in jail as sex offenders than the male general prison population.

I should note that I came across this link surfing the net via Gallus Mag’s link here of Dr. Julia Long’s submission to the UK trans inquiry. This is the bit from Dr. Long’s report:

“Two research studies independently demonstrate that men who have transgendered commit violent crime at the same rate as non-transgendered men. A Swedish longitudinal, cohort study conducted over 30 years found that the rate of convictions for criminal violence perpetrated by m-f transgendered individuals was at the same level as for non-transgender men. (Dhejne, C et al, 2011). The second study looked at m-f transgendered individuals in California’s male prison population in 2009. This study found that a fifth of these individuals were registered sex offenders. The proportion of sex offenders within the m-f transgender category was in fact 6% higher than the proportion of sex offenders in the general male prison population. The proportion of m-f transgenders serving life sentences occurred at a similar rate (13.3%) to that of men in the general prison population (Sexton, Jenness and Sumner, 2009).”

You just made me think of Richard Speck and his ability to turn his situation in prison to his advantage by taking hormones and that startling video that surfaced of him with other inmates sniffing cocaine in womens underwear and more.
His childhood was bad and I know that prison does make people do odd things but that video was so shocking .He was not the norm by any stretch, nor am I saying he was Trans however he had to have been somewhat ok with what he became.

Just read this link balow and the comments. Also watched the video and the reporter was accused of badgering-

” The Columbia Basin Herald’s Robert P. Monteleone interviews BBCC sophomore Makinzee Rhodes, who intends to transfer to EWU and major in psychology and communications, about the new rule passed by the Washington Human Rights Commission regarding gender dysphoria and restroom, dressing room, and locker room facilities”.

Men in the mainstream media are starting to ‘get it’, re. sexual assault of women and children being part of the whole, stupid mentality of gender hierarchy.

This man is actually thanking the women’s movement. I apologise if you think this is off-topic GM – I think it’s little ray of light into males ‘finally’ understanding male entitlement and what it means to society.

I think that the trans borg wants it that way, which is why they go out of their way to censor any women who are coming at this from a radical feminist perspective. (Or just a perspective of knowing how biology works. Seriously, it’s sad that it’s “radical” to want to use the bathroom without perverted men.)

So what’s next? Some retro 1950’s sort of law where a person has to wear three pieces of “women’s” clothing to use facilities designated for women? Are tall women with contralto voices who don’t read sufficiently feminine going to be banned?

Oh, and good to know we’re allowed to report crimes without being considered transphobic.

There has never been a precise definition of “gender identity” other than how people identify at a particular point in time. Under most “gender identity” laws, sex reassignment is optional. Most people who read this blog have seen the link to the Evergreen State College campus police report in the Colleen Francis and “her male genitalia” incident. This campus police report actually says “her legs open and her male genitalia showing”. God forbid, they “mis-gender” anyone.

It’s really sick that a “human rights” organization would ignore the emotional well being and personal privacy of women. This isn’t just about obvious physical dangers and the real concern of voyeurism. It’s about the privacy and human rights of women, especially women who have been raped.

*Based on crime statistics and thousands of years of history, women have legitimate reasons to be suspicious of males in our private spaces.

*The Human Rights Commission of Washington State can’t prove that a male’s “gender identity” is more important than a woman’s right to privacy and bodily autonomy. Besides the obvious physical safety and voyeur issues, women have a fundamental human right to privacy.

*The Human Rights Commission of Washington State can’t prove that a male’s “gender identity” is more important than a rape survivor’s PTSD.

An organization that calls itself “human rights” is essentially saying it’s perfectly fine to further traumatize female rape victims by forcing them to share intimate personal spaces with male bodied persons, and to instantaneously know what a man is thinking. A rape victim with PTSD not only has to ignore her emotional triggers, she is asked to carefully notice a male’s behavior. This is called “human rights” for rape victims with PTSD. It doesn’t matter if a woman is emotionally triggered by a 6’2 180 lb. male in her personal space, it’s her job to quickly assess the situation. All this is doing is further traumatizing her. She was raped, and now she is told that she has no right to privacy, and it’s her job to police the actions of men. The Human Rights Commission of Washington State is telling all female rape victims with PTSD that they must ignore their gut instincts, embarrassment, and fear, and hang around to see if they are going to be raped again.

““Voyeurism, stalking, inappropriate touching, sexual assault — those are all addressed under the criminal code. As soon as that person starts to display inappropriate behavior, that can be dealt with immediately. If they’re doing something they shouldn’t be doing, they need to be made to leave, no matter who they are.”

They always say, “Well, transwomen (biological males) are raped and assaulted too”. This might be true, but women aren’t responsible for male on male violence. Male on male violence is responsible for the assaults and murder of transwomen. Instead of addressing male violence, they dump this problem on women. We will just open up all women’s restrooms, locker rooms, women’s homeless shelters to any man in a skirt. This is not acceptable.

There is no reason why a biological male identifying as transgender or wearing a dress can’t use the men’s restroom and men’s locker room. If the trans identified men/cross dressers fear harassment by other males, then do the following:

““Voyeurism, stalking, inappropriate touching, sexual assault — those are all addressed under the criminal code. As soon as that person starts to display inappropriate behavior, that can be dealt with immediately. If they’re doing something they shouldn’t be doing, they need to be made to leave, no matter who they are.”

Ha! Exactly. Suddenly men get a taste of what it’s like to be on the other side of the fence i.e. not manly-male. Get used to it ‘sisters’, this is what we’ve (and some gay men) have had to put up with all our lives. Find it shocking? You’re getting bashed not because you’re trans but because you’re identifying as female. If you ‘pass’, you’ll get more of the shit.

They don’t seem capable of joining the dots. There is a petition on change.org started by a Rev. in Queensland, to repeal the Gay-bashing defence for straight men if they use excessive force e.g. murder, against gay men who they think have propositioned them. I remember the Greek Gov. in the ’80s writing to the Editor of a lesbian magazine, telling her it was maligning Greek manhood to ask straight men to refrain from responding to lesbian-seeking-lesbian ads. Masculinity really must be fragile. Gay men are also blaming women for straight men bashing them, ha ha! Look in the mirror. You’re not at the top of the social hierarchy guys, and violence against you (by men, not women), is covertly socially sanctioned. Fucking suck it up. We’ve had to.

Not sure if this is on subject, but I ran across this story today, I was was not expecting that ending, but maybe I should have been? It’s a lurid story of a psycho who seemed to have enjoyed destroying people’s teeth.

“Van Nierop tried to block his extradition, first to the Netherlands and then France, claiming to suffer from “psychological problems” including gender identity issues and suicidal tendencies. But he was eventually placed in a prison psychiatric unit in the Loiret department, south of Paris.

“He claimed to have killed his first wife, he played crazy, he said he was transsexual. He tried everything” to avoid extradition, Martin said.”

But, no, surely a person wouldn’t pretend to be trans to get out of a sticky situation? In this case it didn’t work, maybe his mannerisms weren’t correct.

So, today, Mayor DeBlasio announced gender-identity based bathroom access in New York City buildings. I’ve already been banned from at least one news site for saying that this kind of access is bad for women. And my comments were non-disparaging toward trans people and very mild, were all in the vein of concern over making private spaces less safe for women.

I am currently trolling a libfem blog, and here is a quote, re bathroom safety and privacy for women:

a day ago
Speak for yourself! I really don’t care if a man is in the same room while I’m emptying my cup. It’s just a non-issue. What you call “needs” are what I call “wants”.

Yep. Women’s safety is just a ” want”. And if you disagree, you are a bigot.

A man mansplained to me that I should not worry about men peeping through cracks in the stalls because “that is illegal”

Well, isn’t that helpful. Peeping is illegal so I don’t have to be concerned about my privacy at all, right? So nice too, coming from a dudebro.

Oh, and I love trolling SJWs with the very words of MTTs. I mean, I keep thinking they will see through it because “the penis is a female organ” is so damn ridiculous, but they just have to nod and agree lest they look transphobic hahaha.

I find that the best way to discredit MTTs is to simply quote their own bullshit.

Oh yeah, the women on this particular libfem blog basically told a rape victim to stfu, since her safety comes after that of MTTs. These SJWs talk about rape culture all the damn time, then ignore it if MTTs or Muslims are doing the raping.

Makes you wonder if they understand what single sex facility actually means. And the comments on the gothamist make me sick to my stomach.
“Pretty sure young girls are intelligent an capable enough to understand and respect another person’s body.” From “Cetrile”
Sounds like pedo grooming to me. It sickens me that people think so little of female children. When is it enough!

Isn’t asking someone their gender considered Hate Speech now? That’s what I am reading. We cannot, ‘Suggest that someone else is transsexual, transgender or really a man’.
”Intentionally misgendering someone even though you know they are transgender” is considered hate speech now and can result in court action.
So how does one discover who is who without ‘traumatising or ‘triggering’ them or singling someone out? We need more helpful hints like this latest one to guide us.

One example in Greece-
planettransgender .com/greek-transgender-people-are-now-included-in-racisit-and-hate-speech-law/

”Whoever intentionally, in public, by word of mouth, or through the press and the internet, or through any other means or manner, incites, causes, induces or instigates acts or actions that may lead to discrimination, hatred or violence against a person or a group of persons that are identified on the basis of race, color, religion, descent, national or ethnic origin or disability, sexual orientation or gender identity, so as to endanger the public order or pose a threat to life, freedom or physical integrity of the above mentioned persons, shall be punished with a three (3) months to three (3) years imprisonment sentence and a fine of 5,000-20,000 Euros.’

I get so angry when transactivists and their lackeys act as though women being fearful of men in their private spaces is the result of paranoia or prudery, and not plain old common sense. Gallus Mag blogged about this sicko back in 2011:

And after googling his name for updates, I found a bunch of trans blogs dismissing the story as ”rare”, and referring to cases of actual violence against women as “memes”. It’s BS like this that makes me so grateful for woman-centered bloggers like GM, who offer a counterbalance to the insanity.

See, and now, as this blog points out, if we notice this guy is a guy dressed in feminine clothing hanging out in the rest room we can’t say anything about it as he has a legal right to be there until he actually commits assault.

Where are all the hollaback feminists who don’t even want to be spoken to on the subway? Don’t want men saying “Smile, honey” to you on the street in broad daylight but okay with giving a state license to any deviant dude who wants to enter a private space where you pull your pants down?

One is a mildly annoying reminder of male entitlement, the other is a threat to our physical safety, our lives and that of our children.

A Right-wing anti-gay conservative Christian fake medical lobby group is also against deh trans. Why is this good news, or news, period? I really don’t appreciate anti-gay pro-gender right wing trolls posting here under pretense on being allies to lesbians and gays. Stop now. Final warning.

No man with any ordinary sense of manners or decency would want to go into spaces set aside for women (like toilets). The men that do want to do this, in and of itself that tells us they are creeps to start with.

What I find most telling is transactivists’ resistance to rigorous research on transgenderism. Years ago, I read the results of studies that showed those who were gay or Lesbian had no greater incidence of mental illness or personality disorders than anyone else. This sort of research was the basis for no longer diagnosing same-sex attraction as a psychiatric problem. (The only real difference from the straight population was a rate of anxiety similar to rates found in other marginalized groups.)

But transactivists seem to attack anyone who tries to look into the causes of their condition and the results of “treatment” rather than hewing to the party line of “I was born with a woman’s brain so I need facial surgery, beautiful clothes, and sparkly nail polish–not to mention access to naked women in locker rooms–or I’ll kill myself.” At this point, I suspect they’d call any serious study “transphobic,” precisely because they know it would find high rates of autogynephilia (along with symptoms of other paraphilias, high-functioning autism, and personality disorders).

I think a lot of the non-transgender men who support identity-based access to restrooms, etc., don’t want these weird (transwo)men in their space any more than women do. And, of course, they know they have nothing to fear from most transmen, so they’re willing to throw us in front of the bus–again. The women who go along seem to suffer from either Stockholm Syndrome or terminal naivete. (When I was in college, I met a few young women who resisted learning basic self-defense techniques to use against a rapist because they believed in non-violence and didn’t want to hurt anyone!)

Men are afraid of each other–and so we’re supposed to protect them by taking one for the team? They should sort out their own problems and stop trying to hide behind our skirts.

Yep, a man told me that I was a bigot for worrying about men peeping though bathroom stalls since “that’s illegal”

What’s wrong with preventing peeping from happening in the first place? Sure, it’s illegal, but you’ve still been peeped on!!

But it’s easy for a dudebro to dismiss because he will *never* have to worry about being raped and or perved on in the bathroom.

Another dudebro told me that butch MTTs have the right to feel *safe* in women’s private spaces because it would be rude to keep butch lesbians out, so why be a meanie and discriminate against bearded manly men who just need to change with the ladies?

So let me get this straight: If we take precautions, we’re blamed for being bigoted. If we’re assaulted, we’re blamed for not taking precautions. Glad we have that sorted.

And what is with all their comparisons to butch lesbians in ladies rooms, anyway? I’m middle-aged and have only once in my life been made vaguely uneasy by a lesbian; it wasn’t in women-only space and she was an obviously disturbed person. On the other hand, I can’t even remember all the times men have acted in ways I found threatening. Perhaps men are projecting their own predatory tendencies. Or maybe it’s even less complicated and more childish, along the lines of “How come lesbians get to be with the women and I don’t? No fair!”

The guy’s attorney tried to get the charges dismissed on the grounds that authorities can’t prove the women didn’t consent to being filmed in the bathroom! “We don’t know if they (the women) gave consent,” Simons told the judge. “People do odd things.”

So if laws mandating restroom use without inquiry into the user’s gender become common, will women photographed or assaulted by men in the restroom be blamed for not questioning the man’s right to be there–even though it’s considered hate speech if they’re wrong? I wish I could believe that was impossible, but it wouldn’t be the first time women were placed in that sort of double bind.

And it’s basically what I wrote above: “If we take precautions, we’re blamed for being bigoted. If we’re assaulted, we’re blamed for not taking precautions.” The men who take advantage of these laws will call us transphobic if we leave when we see them and claim we’re asking for it if we don’t–and be quite willing to threaten us with hate speech charges if we say anything.

And in a lot of cases, re peeping, especially the clandestine kind (easy to manage in say a communal shower area as in a gym) what’s to prevent the perv defense being that it is merely a case of he said/she said?

One person’s word against another. Who you gonna believe? The woman, or the poor oppressed tranny?

Also, what’s to prevent the perv from arguing, probably successfully, that xie is the target of anti-trans discrimination?

A friend of mine asked a great question last night. I need to start asking this more frequently. If this is primarily about SAFETY, then surely crossdressers – transvestites – the people who dress as women for fun- should also have the legal right to use women’s safe spaces, no? I mean, if an MTT is going to get beat up in the men’s bathroom then surely your garden variety drag queen will too?

Of course, they will argue that MTTs *must* use women’s facilities, otherwise they will kill themselves. But but, i thought it was about safety? Not external gender validation? But safety? And are drag queens not people, people who are just as worthy of protection as MTTs?

It is interesting though, isn’t it, how many MTTs and genderqueer utterly reject gender neutral and trans only spaces. They MUST, MUST have access to lesbian festivals, woman’s only change rooms etc. Why is that? Perhaps because their fetish is such that their ‘identity’ , that they are ‘real women for sure’, must be validated and that it has fuck all to do with safety?

And also, would it not be smarter for these trans groups to simply lobby state governments to change M to F on their birth certificates, immediately giving them the legal right to access women’s spaces? Of course, that would require *transitioning*. And isn’t trans all about feeling that you were born in the wrong body? Your gender identity doesn’t match your body? So why are you keeping your penis then? Why not transition, get the F on the legal documents, and you are good to go?

Oh right. Because it isn’t about transitioning. It’s about ‘internal gender identity’. It’s about keeping your penis and demanding that lesbians suck it. It’s about forcing the rest of society to validate your sick fetish. It’s about claiming special snowflake status based on nothing but an internal subjective state, and forcing the rest of us to play along, and then crying ‘murder’ when we don’t.

The HRC doesn’t seem to grok what they’ve done so they do this backpedaling shit. Their website says explicitly that CROSSDRESSERS are protected. Lindstrand repeatedly asserts that aonyone dressed or “acting like” a woman should have access to the women’s bathroom.

2 days ago
If you think that women need to wait until inappropriate behavior STARTS to say something about males in their locker rooms, why argue for women’s locker rooms at all? This author clearly believes that women have no right to women’s rooms in the first place, because this argument could be made for any men, in a dress or not, in the women’s rooms. Hey ladies, just wait until they do something to do, THEN complain. Oh and what does “acting like a woman” mean? Do you have any idea how offensive that is to women?

And this one:

2 days ago
So, let me get this straight: apparently men, as a class, are so very dangerous that they simply can’t be trusted not to assault someone they see in a men’s restroom who “presents” as female – so male-to-female transsexuals just HAVE to use the women’s restroom, for their own “safety.” Yet somehow, women are expected to just shut up and ignore this danger of men when it comes to someone who is obviously male in a women’s restroom (unfortunately for them, not all trans people “pass” as their desired gender). Got it.
It seems once again, women are expected to capitulate to men’s needs at the expense of our own. This whole article is a primer for that. What a bunch of bull, to put it mildly

Right. So, cismen are a clear and present DANGER to trannies, but not to womyn and girls.

Oh, and also on this article(I think), an MTT was straight up saying that WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT women’s SAFETY THIS IS PURELY ABOUT MTT WHO ARE IN DANGER”

Dianne Skoll
Brian Bishop How is anyone disenfranchised by someone quietly using the washroom?

I have to repeat because you lot do not get it: A democratic society protects peoples lives and safety. It does *not* make any guarantees to protect your “comfort”.

And this is a safety issue. Transgender people are the ones getting assaulted.

Yeah. It s all about MTT safety! Women don’t exist!

Lori Stewart
Let’s try to keep in mind who the victims are in this issue, the transgender people, and also that the “bathroom/locker room issue” is being incited to further a private agenda of religious based phobia in order to control and take advantage of unknowing individuals suseptible to mystical based cults, both financially and morally. While this is truely a shame I believe there are many religious people who see through this fog of hate and bigotry. Yes, I said the “B” word.

How dare women demand a safe space. A space to be free from being perved on. The gall!

I’m somewhat surprised that we haven’t heard from “trans women” (or whatever I’m supposed to call them). Men who have become women (or whatever they have done) are probably not safe in the men’s room if they are found out (given how a lot of men behave). If one of these creepy bathroom perverts catches sight of a real trans person in the women’s room wouldn’t the trans person be in even more danger than a real woman? If the idea is to be safe, some method of sorting out the baddies would be imperative I would think.

Given that this whole business seems to be driven by the “feels” and given that it’s impossible to figure out for sure how any individual is feeling today (we have to take their word for it, pretty much) perhaps the only answer here is truly private spaces for everyone.

Yes, this has occurred to me, too. Trans people who have genuinely tried to “assimilate” just GO to the bathroom. Likely no one would notice or care if they really just “wanted to pee” as they say. Enshrining this crap into law and allowing every cross-dresser and mentally disturbed wig-wearer a legal right to have a presence is just as dangerous for them as it is for us.

If “trans women” or “transwomen” want to avoid men in the loo, they shouldn’t support these diktats. They should just GO.

Well he is charming isn’t he, as I just discovered yesterday.He acts similar to an ignorant teen who thinks he is the trans white knight whilst threatening women.

Cetrile is a piece of work as well as a poster here has said.
I have been banned from Gothamist for responding with facts taken from the public domain, calling him out and posting videos to prove my concerns are not overstated.
So I have lodged a complaint stating I am victim myself and asking for their reasoning. Granted I was cross but he seems so smug.

He responded to someone saying a 7 yo girl doesn’t need to see a penis in the bathroom.
Cetrile
Pretty sure young girls are intelligent an capable enough to understand and respect another person’s body.

I said – ‘Any healthy male adult would be appalled that some child / young girl may witness them in a state of privacy. Are you saying you find that acceptable or are you saying that young girl should look away out of respect for your body? A girl who may not have been exposed to that before? If so I would love to report you .

Cetrile
If you’re afraid of your child seeing a human body, you’re part of the problem.

I said- ‘What???? A grown mans body and my child seeing that is my decision not yours. I am amused at your lack of insight. Can you think of anyone but your own needs?’

Something these guys seem to forget when they try to make parents feel ashamed that we don’t want our kids viewing naked men, telling us that we are overreacting or that a penis “won’t bite,” is the flip side of the coin: I do not my want kids getting naked in front of these men!

If my kids are in the ladies pool locker room, they are probably also dressing/undressing. This is why I prefer the women’s dressing room to be free of males. I do not want these dudes peeping on my kids, nor would I want to be accused of allowing male strangers to view my children while they are undressing. Why should we be made to feel guilty for not wanting our kids to be naked in front of adult male strangers?

It goes beyond the fact that my kids might see something I don’t want them to see — it is very much also that I do not want my kids to be fodder for the sick sexual fantasies of these men!

Excellent point, SkepticalMom. So much of what these pervs say is simply pedophilic grooming – and in a way, what with their attempted guilt trips to the parents, they’re “grooming” the adults as well.

Yeah, what’s ironic is that we now live in a world where exposing children to *parental* nudity is now suspect, even under wholesome circumstances. Yet these idiots are advocating for exposed penis everywhere and if you think it is bad for your children, you’re a bigot and “that’s your problem”. Up is down and down is up.

And then there’s the idiot moderator making the segregated lunch counter comparison. There’s just so many things wrong with that and really so sick of trans and their sycophants co-opting the civil rights movement.

As if denying a formerly enslaved people basic human rights is exactly the same as allowing men a legal right to expose their genitals to women and children in private spaces.

(1.) The Human Rights Commission of Washington State is violating the human privacy rights of females.

(2.) The Human Rights Commission of Washington State is jeopardizing the physical safety and the psychological and emotional well being of females. It’s a fact that males identifying as women or cross dressing have committed crimes inside women’s restrooms, locker rooms, and women’s homeless shelters. There are numerous examples.

(3.) Not only is the Human Rights Commission of Washington State endangering women and violating their privacy rights, it’s clearly guilty of perpetuating offensive sex stereotypes.

“You can tell if someone is lying or if they’re there for reasons they shouldn’t be. Are they dressed like a woman? Are they making any attempt to look like a woman? What are their mannerisms like? Are they speaking low or high? ”

When Lindstrand says, “Are they making any attempt to look like a woman?”, I want Lindstrand to explain to me what “looking like a woman” means.

The Human Rights Commission of Washington State is essentially reducing the female sex to a set of sex stereotypes. It’s sex stereotypes on its face. How are women supposed to dress? How are women supposed to speak? Are women in jeans and a sweat shirt really women? Or, do we send them to the men’s restroom? A mother can’t go into the women’s restroom wearing jeans. She has to run home and put on a dress and makeup first. This is how we know she is a woman. “Gender identity” is nothing more than sex stereotypes, and these sex stereotypes are being codified into law. We are told that this is progressive and “human rights”. Try explaining “gender identity” to me without resorting to sex stereotypes. The female sex really does exist, and it is not a collection of offensive sex stereotypes.

There are about seven million people in Washington State. Half of the seven million are women. All these women should sue the Human Rights Commission. If they can’t find a lawyer, do it pro se (without a lawyer). Half a million to a million pro se lawsuits. It could be done.

I wonder if HRC would try to pull this bs where I live, considering that it’s a pretty conservative state. I would definitely sue if I lived there. Maybe I should go to law school. We need lawyers who will actually side with women. In conservative states they make it as hard as possible for women to have access to abortion and birth control (you know, that thing that prevents abortions), while in liberal states they make it so you can have those things, but you have to be willing to share bathrooms with men, and apparently sexual assault can be dealt with immediately. Conservatives and liberals are both the enemies of women.

Seattle is aggressively pushing the trans agenda. Here’s a police training video about transgenderism that all officers in Seattle are now required to watch, thanks to the lobbying efforts of Mayor Ed Murray. I really doubt that there was a pressing need for officers to take a basic class in civility, given the long history of natural oddballs that live here. And to the best of my knowledge, Seattle police have not been particularly egregious in their handling of transgender individuals.

No, this is a political agenda, masquerading as a harmless police training video. The music background is absolutely nauseating.

Hi Gallus, my previous comment was sent before I had finished it, please could you post this one instead? Thank you.

@Cee
Good post.
The comments(88) below the video are well worth a read, though they are being censored. A commenter with the nik ‘John Stuart Mill’ is doing a fine job, such as;
“The goofy moderators keep removing any post which points out that 85% of male “transwomen” are sporting 100% normal male external reproductive organs.
Why are y’all working so hard to hide this provable scientific fact.
Male “transwomen” are not intersex and they are not female-bodied. They’re male-bodied because they were born male, they have male DNA and male hormones, and have had no surgery.”
and;
“Balderdash. I don’t hate them, I don’t even own a pitchfork — or a torch.
The truth is that your pro-trans, anti-female social engineering is provably DANGEROUS to women and girls, but that doesn’t stop you guys? Does it?
Every time a male “transwomen” is in danger in the U.S. it’s because people like YOU have enabled him and pandered to him, encouraging someone who looks like Charles Bronson in a sundress to go traipsing around town looking for trouble — and of course he then finds it. This is a misogynistic, homophobic nation. Hello?
The trouble he finds is NOT at the hands of feminist women. NEVER that. He finds it at the hands of sexist, homophobic men, the same men who would beat ME up for being “mouthy” and not “feminine” enough to suit their sexist ideas. THINK about what you’re advocating and what you’re enabling. Sheesh.”

3. Gunner Scott
“Eventually, I was lucky enough to work full time as the Executive Director of the Massachusetts Transgender Political Coalition, which is still one of very few trans led, trans organizations with paid staff and an office in the country.”http://underneaththis.com/2014/04/08/interview-gunner-scott/

Wow. Thanks for the reveal on “Mac” (shiver). I am well familiar with John Stuart Mill — she has some of the best, most cogent, and on-target commentary against the trans agenda being pushed so hard in Washington State, and I always enjoy reading her comments.

I just encountered another recent Seattle crime that fell under the radar:

“Seattle police have arrested a suspect in several incidents of indecent exposure and voyeurism late last year in the Miller Park neighborhood.

“Around 3:40 AM Sunday, February 28th, Officers Katrina Walter, Brad Devore and Shawn Crow were responding to a report of a suspicious person creeping around a building in the 300 block of 18th Avenue. On the way to the scene, they spotted the 33-year-old suspect, who was wanted by police in connection with a number of different incidents in the East Precinct (see post below).

“Officers arrested the 33-year-old suspect, who identifies as a woman, and booked her into the King County Jail for a $100,000 voyeurism warrant.”

This Mac Scott McGregor is now running for Seattle City Council. Me thinks the “150 Shades of Grey” may not be taken lightly by the majority of Seattle voters, but who knows? If someone can preserve these videos so they are not erased, it would be great, as I have a hunch that McGregor must have forgotten about their existence and perhaps would like to erase them, now that he’s in the running and even was featured in a My Northwest column today.

Gallus, this is about 2 women who were murdered and I wondered if you would want to post it here or somewhere else. The sentiments /danger are in line with this post although the circumstances differ.
‘Yesterday I was killed but worse was the humiliation which came after’http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35756321

I suppose this has already been posted here, but I wanted to leave this link on the Washington State ruling thread, as it applies very much to what is going on here, as well as to any other community that is considering putting transgender rights bills into law that allow men into women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, showers, etc.

f I ever catch a trans phobic. you better worry for you will not like what happens. I got plans for one of you. a big gay man will be your new owner but first you will be castrated chemically and well you will find out how we live. I hope you like a funnel shoved in your hip and mothballs size pellets dropped in. because that will happen. right after that watch the transformation begin
enough to never become male again. I will pass you past the one year mark enough your trans phobic ass will be stuck between male and female.”

Indeed. Trans women are all beautiful and they must be treasured. <—-actual quote from an MTT who also identifies as a coyote. I replied to "her", and said yes , TW are gorgeous, and linked to a video of Stefonknee Wolscht. The trans woman/coyote replied with an angry screed, exposing xir narcissistic rage.

If that’s you in the pic, you definitely look female. In my 36 years of life, I’ve seen many people. I can easily tell if someone is male or female even if that person is wearing jeans and a sweatshirt or has short hair.

I appreciate the information. With the new laws I’ve wondered how to know for sure. My concern is for my kids. My daughter is nine and I don’t always escort her into the bathroom because I also have a six year old son who doesn’t want to go into the girls bathroom anymore. What do I tell her? Wait till he or she touches you?

I’m less concerned with molesters, rapists, and pervs than I am with more subtle matters.

First of all, there is a cultural taboo against seeing opposite-sex genitals. and it is considered immodest. We can have a debate as to whether or not this is a useful taboo, but it is there. While I personally have no problem undressing with guys, I am also not ready to call more modest women hateful bigots because they don’t want to see a penis when they step out of the locker room shower.

How this going to affect women from subcultures that are very modest and patriarchal, many of which have fathers who are already anxious about letting them do things like swim? And now they may see naked male bodies in the locker room? How will this affect women from those cultures? How can we reconcile greater cultural diversity with much freer sexual norms?

In this whole age of affirmative consent, women are told to draw clear boundaries. “I don’t want to see a stranger’s penis” seems like a very reasonable boundary to draw, yet now women are told they are hateful bigots if they have this boundary. What will this mean for other boundaries? What about someone who exposes his penis on the subway? How can we teach women that they have the right to draw boundaries, but that they have to be cool seeing with naked penises?

I have the daughter issue too. I’d be ok with her seeing naked male bodies if I were there… what if I send her in alone and she steps out of the shower and sees a guy with a hard-on? (Guys, you can tell me if I am wrong, but I understand this is something that sometimes just happens through no fault of one’s own to decent, non-perv guys.) It would feel awkward. It would be more difficult to teach her about having boundaries about when it is ok to see a penis, when it isn’t, etc. I don’t want to have to be a helicopter parent. I want her to have spaces she can wander into and learn to be independent. I don’t want to move towards a society where we can’t give our girls freedom, where they always have to be accompanied.

Not to mention the greater conversation of what it means to be a girl, as far as I am concerned the only thing that makes one a girl is the plumbing, and changing your clothes, hair, hobbies does not change your sex. Girls can have short hair and wear pants and date girls and be engineers whose hobby is weightlifting. It doesn’t turn you into a boy. Post-op is one thing, but I don’t see myself saying “That’s a woman who was born with a penis”. At some point words lose meaning.

And where will this lead? Will women with penises start wanting urinals in rest rooms? With no physical requirement to becoming a women, will jobs that currently have separate requirements for men and women (firefighting, army, sports, etc) abandon them, and if so are we effectively barring all but a few women from holding those jobs? What does this mean for Title 9? Are we really ready for a gender-neutral society?

I don’t know about firefighters, but the U.S. military does absolutely have lower physical requirements for women:

“For men ages 17 to 21, that means performing at least 35 push-ups and 47 sit-ups, as well as running two miles in no more than 16 minutes and 36 seconds. Male recruits ages 22 to 26 have to complete a minimum of 31 push-ups, 43 sit-ups and a two-mile run in 17 minutes and 30 seconds or less.

Women recruits ages 17 to 21 must be able to do 13 push-ups and 47 sit-ups, and post a time of no more than 19 minutes and 42 seconds on the two-mile run. Female recruits ages 22 to 26 have to perform 11 push-ups, 43 sit-ups and a two-mile run of 20 minutes and 36 seconds or less.”

Women have also attempted the far more rigorous requirements for elite units, and the vast majority did not make the cut.

It is true that most women (and most men) do not make the cut for elite military units, but the 2 women who recently made ranger did NOT do so on the basis of lesser standards! They did every single thing the guys did, and rightly so. The standards should relate directly to the job. Long ago, firefighters had arbitrary and discriminatory height standards, but they do not now.

amareldys The melting pot idea brings up interesting points. Religious freedom means allowing space for everyone so what is the solution when some have such strict moral guidelines for what is considered decent?
We have been told by men that we cannot complain about being ogled or worse if we are wearing a tight top because we are asking for admiration/attention by virtue of the fact we chose to wear it yet its ok for girls to see naked male bodies and for them to be seen as well.
Over here molestations happen due to cultural differences or ignorance. Western women are considered loose and fair game.
The excuse that men don’t look is a lame one and I have seen mtt looking, that’s what they do, compare themselves to other women for validation. Its the nature of the AG at the least.

What will happen if a modest woman comes across a ‘female’ with a male body in a change room and their male family members are waiting outside? I am one of those women who have no desire to be seen naked by a strange male so my reaction is to not avail myself of public facilities anymore.
The daughter issue- how can I educate them on what not to do then say its ok for someone with a male body and ‘female’ mind to be in what they think is ‘their’ private space and its ok for them to see you in a state of undress?
I am not saying Trans will molest them however it does leave the door ajar for more predators than ever before to sneak in.
People are saying that some men have always invaded womens bathrooms to assault them and its not the MTT that are doing it.
Well, I say there was never a time before now that men, who look like men dressed as women or MTT dressed in jeans and a tee shirt who claim to be women, have been legally allowed access just on their stating they are female. In the past we could at least have an idea who should and should not be in there.
Now we are not allowed to ask or question their presence for fear of offending (I dislike that word) them.
I saw a video the other day of a late teen boy being forced to leave the womens loo by security and his girl friends yelling that he was a girl too and he should stay, while filming it. The guard asked for ID but he had none, so was evicted. If this guy was MTT how would we know and if they were doing it for the camera as a prank or to make a point for gender neutral loos then it backfired as he looked, sounded and was dressed as a typical male teen.
I am confused to heck and beyond at the logic.